Station Modifications and Gender Discrimination
Today’s Burning Question: My department is an all career medium sized department in the mid-west with 7 firehouses. We recently promoted several engineers, which prompted a series of transfers. In the process a female firefighter (engineer) was denied a transfer to a single engine firehouse because it has no female locker room or restroom facilities. The firehouse has always been an all-male station and the department has publically stated that it needs to remain this way for now in order to avoid any problems due to the lack of female facilities. The department’s plan to renovate the stations had to be placed on hold due to budget constraints.
The female firefighter was advised of the reason that her transfer request was denied, and she promptly filed a grievance with the union. The union went directly to the city’s law department bypassing the fire chief – and I don’t know what was discussed but the previous transfers were summarily changed to accommodate her request to be reassigned to this firehouse.
It seems to me that the fire administration was in a no-win situation, and did everything they could to avoid having to make costly renovations we cannot afford. Can she really force the city to put her in a situation that may then lead to further gender based problems? And can she force the city to renovate a station when it lacks the funds to do so?
Answer: Wow… that is a long question. Do you want the short answers? Yes to the first… and to the second, no but it would sure be advisable.
The long answer – that is going to take some time. First of all, gender based employment discrimination is illegal. I am sure that is no surprise, right? In 2012 that is common sense. What may be surprising to your fire chief and his administration (how did I know your fire chief is male…. call it attorney’s intuition) is that treating a female firefighter differently than a similarly situated male firefighter is discrimination. Good intentions (“we did it for her own good”) really don’t count for much when the solution to possible discrimination is itself discriminatory. My guess is the conversation between the law department and the fire chief focused on that aspect a bit.
If a male engineer of a given level of seniority would have been given an assignment to the station in question, it would constitute gender discrimination to deny the assignment to a female. The fact that the station has no facilities for females is irrelevant… well, maybe irrelevant isn’t the right term – because the fact that the fire station cannot ALREADY accommodate females can be – in and of itself – evidence of gender discrimination… So there is no need to wait until a female is assigned to the station and has a problem for there to be a problem.
The second part of your question asks about “costly renovations”… there is no requirement that fire stations be retrofitted with separate male and female facilities. In fact, many fire departments have been able to accommodate women simply by adding locks to bathroom doors and requiring the doors to be locked when in use. OK, it is not perfect but it is cheap and certainly is viable as a short term interim measure. However, if you have had women in your department for very long – these types of problems should have been addressed long ago. There are cases where the failure to make reasonable accommodations for females in the workplace over the course of time have contributed to large verdicts against fire departments for sex discrimination… much larger than the cost of renovations.
BTW… I would like to have been a fly on the wall when the union met with the city lawyers… or even better listened in on the conversation between the city lawyers and the fire chief…
Curt Varone offered an excellent answer with potential solutions. The potential that women would be firefighters and need accommodations effectively goes back to the beginning of fire departments. The best time to start planning for this was last week; the next best time is now. Put an info request out on USFA’s TRADENET for ways that other FDs have solved this. Sit down with a strategic planning group and create a plan.
Its a shame that something that can be fixed with little effort would still be a risk when so many have already solved it. The distrust and conflict created by a solvable problem was unnecessary.
Wow! It’s 2012 and we’re still discussing
Fire station Restroom Facilities in older stations. How long has your FD had women FF’s on the job?
The lock’s on the door should only be looked at as a “Temporary’ solution and making the final building modification completed ASAP.
In my own situation, I have friend who after 25 years of having to deal with this type of temporary solution has filed a lawsuit against her FD and City.
Taking a “step back”, if this has as you say:
“Always been a all male station…”
At what point in time is the FD not sued for denial of Over Time Assignment Denial in the past? What impact has it had on the Women FF child care issues?
Lots to think about other than just modifying a building.
Curt. One quick addition. The fire chief is a female. New to the department in 2011. Mr. Love, good to know about TRADENET. I’m not in a position to suggest much but I am sure there will be a more permanent solution to the lack of female facilities soon. Ukfbbuff, really? Yes, we’ve had women on the job since the late 70’s. No excuse there. Has our city government taken any action against the lack of compliance? No. Have any of the female firefighters here taken action against the department for the lack of compliance? No. Not even now. The female engineer got her assignment there. That’s all she wanted. None before have ever demanded to work at this firehouse. They’ve all been okay with the department’s lack of attention to the station design since it’s the only one left. Unless you’ve worked here you wouldn’t realize that that’s the least of our problems. Gender discrimination? Technically, yes it is. Have we adapted? Yes. Thanks for posting this one, Curt.
Alfonzo
Thank you for the update. I would not have guessed that a female chief would have misconstrued gender discrimination law like that…
Hopefully it gets the ball rolling WITHOUT causing difficulties in other areas of the budget. Sometimes the bean counters get a tad spiteful when forced to spend and will use funds earmarked for a needed piece of apparatus or some other necessity.
Funny my department gets it, but it is the adminstrator from the Facility Design, Budget, and Even Human Resources that don’t understand. They think that since we have a couple of gender neutral stations that we can automatically transfer all of our females there and not have to address the other FD Facilities. The use of gender as a reason for yours or anyone elses assignment is wrong. The rule should be the Fire Department assigns fire fighters regardless of gender or situation. The minute an assignment is determined by gender, race, orientation, etc. is the minute you could be spending a lot of money getting out of an EEOC law suit.
I’m not in fire service, but have a question regarding this accommodation thing. I have done community theater and have shared both bathroom facilities and dressing rooms with men. Straight men. I never had a problem. I dressed with men dressing right next to me. Peed in a stall with men in the other stalls, or even on a few occasions with a man peeing at a urinal in the bathroom. There was never an issue of inappropriate behavior. Why is this (the facilities thing) an issue in the fire service?
There are at least two reasons.
First – unlike the dressing rooms you are referring to, most fire stations bathrooms that date back more than a few years have a row of urinals with little/no privacy separation. In addition many bathrooms have shower facilities – similarly with little to no privacy separation. There was no consideration of women being present (newer stations had separate facilities – older stations were built with the assumption that it would be staffed by all men). A woman using a sink, a mirror to comb her hair, or even walking to/from a stall in such a room would be directly observing men urinating… and perhaps showering. And of course if she were to shower (common practice after a fire) the men would be able to observe her.
Second – without making judgments about right/wrong – not everyone shares your sensitivities regarding bathroom use.